similar to: [LLVMdev] a very strange question about adding new instrinsic.

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 200 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] a very strange question about adding new instrinsic."

2008 Aug 22
0
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC
OK, I've checked it in for you, thanks. Please do contact Chris about write access. On Aug 22, 2008, at 12:38 AMPDT, Gary Benson wrote: > No, I don't. > > Cheers, > Gary > > Dale Johannesen wrote: >> This looks OK to check in, do you have write access? >> >> On Aug 21, 2008, at 6:38 AMPDT, Gary Benson wrote: >> >>> Dale Johannesen
2008 Aug 21
2
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC
Dale Johannesen wrote: > On Aug 19, 2008, at 7:18 AMPDT, Gary Benson wrote: > > I'm trying to implement llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC. I've > > modelled my patch (attached) on the implementation in X86, but > > when I try and compile my test file (also attached) with llc I > > get the error "Cannot yet select: 0x10fa4ad0: ch = MemBarrier > >
2008 Aug 22
3
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC
No, I don't. Cheers, Gary Dale Johannesen wrote: > This looks OK to check in, do you have write access? > > On Aug 21, 2008, at 6:38 AMPDT, Gary Benson wrote: > > >Dale Johannesen wrote: > >>On Aug 19, 2008, at 7:18 AMPDT, Gary Benson wrote: > >>>I'm trying to implement llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC. I've > >>>modelled my patch
2008 Aug 19
2
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC
Hi all, I'm trying to implement llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC. I've modelled my patch (attached) on the implementation in X86, but when I try and compile my test file (also attached) with llc I get the error "Cannot yet select: 0x10fa4ad0: ch = MemBarrier 0x10fa4828, 0x10fa4c68, 0x10fa4be0, 0x10fa4be0, 0x10fa4be0, 0x10fa4be0". This presumably means my "membarrier"
2012 May 12
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Odd PPC inline asm constraint
On Tue, 01 May 2012 21:25:29 -0500 Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 19:58 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 17:47 -0500, Hal Finkel wrote: > > > By default it should build for > > > whatever the current host is (no special flags required). To > > > specifically build for something else, use:
2012 May 02
4
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Odd PPC inline asm constraint
On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 19:58 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote: > On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 17:47 -0500, Hal Finkel wrote: > > By default it should build for > > whatever the current host is (no special flags required). To > > specifically build for something else, use: > > -ccc-host-triple powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu > > or > > -ccc-host-triple
2007 Jan 12
2
[LLVMdev] Inserting an assembly instruction in the calling sequence of the powerpc target
Hi all, I'm currently implementing a linux/ppc target in llvm. The abis between Darwin/ppc and linux/ppc are different and I'm running into problems with vararg calls. Before a variadic method is called, an extra instruction must be executed (which is creqv 6, 6, 6). This instruction is not necessary in Darwin/ppc. I looked into the PowerPC target implementation and the code generation
2007 Jan 14
0
[LLVMdev] Inserting an assembly instruction in the calling sequence of the powerpc target
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > I'm currently implementing a linux/ppc target in llvm. The abis between cool > Darwin/ppc and linux/ppc are different and I'm running into problems > with vararg calls. ok > Before a variadic method is called, an extra instruction must be > executed (which is creqv 6, 6, 6). This instruction is not necessary in >
2007 Feb 17
2
[LLVMdev] Linux/ppc backend
Evan Cheng wrote: > I think the easiest thing for you to do is to define a separate CALL > instruction with a different set of Defs. This instruction should > only be selected when the predicate isMacho is true. Also update > PPCRegisterInfo.cpp getCalleeSavedRegs() to return a different list > when subtarget->isMachoABI() is true. > Alright, thx Evan, that's
2004 May 09
0
[LLVMdev] Testing LLVM on OS X
On Tue, 4 May 2004, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Tue, 4 May 2004, Chris Lattner wrote: > > I suspect that a large reason that LLVM does worst than a native C > > compiler with the CBE+GCC is that LLVM generates very low-level C code, > > and I'm not convinced that GCC is doing a very good job (ie, without > > syntactic loops). > > Yup, this is EXACTLY what is
2002 Aug 05
1
{long} smbd maxes CPU when returning user details and loops...
Hello all, I've been using Samba for a few years now and have finally come across a problem that I can't seem to sort out myself so I thought I'd use your intelligence instead... Heres the situation. I've got a Linux box (2.4.17) acting as a PDC for some dual boot Linux/NT boxen. Currently users have a single home directory (over NIS to Linux and Samba to Windows) with separate
2008 Aug 21
0
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC
On Aug 19, 2008, at 7:18 AMPDT, Gary Benson wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm trying to implement llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC. I've modelled > my patch (attached) on the implementation in X86, but when I try and > compile my test file (also attached) with llc I get the error "Cannot > yet select: 0x10fa4ad0: ch = MemBarrier 0x10fa4828, 0x10fa4c68, > 0x10fa4be0,
2007 Feb 02
0
[LLVMdev] Linux/ppc backend
Nicolas, Would you point me to the Linux/PPC ABI documents you are using so I can better judge what your restrictions are? These changes also have an effect on debugging and exception handling. Cheers, -- Jim On 2-Feb-07, at 08:58 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I have almost completed the implementation of a linux/ppc backend > in llvm. There were a few
2008 Aug 21
0
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC
This looks OK to check in, do you have write access? On Aug 21, 2008, at 6:38 AMPDT, Gary Benson wrote: > Dale Johannesen wrote: >> On Aug 19, 2008, at 7:18 AMPDT, Gary Benson wrote: >>> I'm trying to implement llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC. I've >>> modelled my patch (attached) on the implementation in X86, but >>> when I try and compile my test
2007 Feb 12
1
[LLVMdev] Linux/ppc backend
Hi Jim, I didn't use any documents, but intensively looked at gcc's output. I think this document: http://refspecs.freestandards.org/elf/elfspec_ppc.pdf is the last specification of the ABI. Cheers, Nicolas Jim Laskey wrote: > Nicolas, > > Would you point me to the Linux/PPC ABI documents you are using so I > can better judge what your restrictions are? These changes
2007 Feb 02
5
[LLVMdev] Linux/ppc backend
Hi everyone, I have almost completed the implementation of a linux/ppc backend in llvm. There were a few things to modify in lib/Target/PowerPC with a lot of "if (!isDarwin)". There are some places where I need help before saying the port is complete. I attached the diff file as a reference 1) In order to generate a creqv instruction before a vararg call, I created a new
2007 Feb 02
0
[LLVMdev] Linux/ppc backend
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > I have almost completed the implementation of a linux/ppc backend in llvm. Cool! > There were a few things to modify in > lib/Target/PowerPC with a lot of "if (!isDarwin)". Some meta comments: 1. Please don't change PPC -> llvmPPC. I assume that you did this because PPC is a #define in some system header. Please
2007 Feb 06
1
[LLVMdev] automatically generating intrinsic declarations
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 12:28:56PM -0800, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Dan Gohman wrote: > > > LLVM knows what all the types of the intrinsic functions are; I thought, > > why are users (including llvm-gcc...) required to duplicate all this > > information in order to use them? I mean in order to call > > getOrInsertFunction to get declarations for
2009 May 09
1
[LLVMdev] Codegen error with instrinsic
I am getting the following error when i am trying to generate the code. In the optimization pass I have inserted some calls llvm.annotation.i32 class to provide indentification tags to loops to be used in subsequent passes. Codegen is complaining about these annotations. llc -march=c ham1_seq.bc3 Error: Code generator does not support intrinsic function 'llvm.annotation.i32'! llc
2012 May 02
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Odd PPC inline asm constraint
On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 17:47 -0500, Hal Finkel wrote: > By default it should build for > whatever the current host is (no special flags required). To > specifically build for something else, use: > -ccc-host-triple powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu > or > -ccc-host-triple powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu So LLVM isn't biarch capable? Meaning one LLVM compiler cannot generate both